Question: which is the appropriate way to use lmFit in my case?
gravatar for sabrina.shao
7.3 years ago by
sabrina.shao220 wrote:
Hello, everyone: I have the following experiment that I want to conduct, but I am not sure which is the right way to use design matrix and contrasts. Here is the experiment: say I have 3 different strains that are genetically different, A, B and C where A is the control. I also have two different treatments, T1 and T2. For each strain, I have 4 arrays for each treatment, so in total, I have 24 arrays. What I want to find out is the significantly differentially expressed genes for the following comparison: 1) for control strain A: T1 vs T2 2)under T1, B vs. A (control) 3) under T1, C vs. A 4) for B, T1 vs T2 5) for C, T1 vs T2 6) interaction term of A and B , T1 and T2 7) interaction term of A and C, T1 and T2. There are two ways I could use lmFit One is: for the design matrix, I use the following code: A_T1, A_T2, B_T1, B_T2, C_T1, C_T2 sample1: 1 ,0 ,0, 0, 0 , 0 sample2 : Then make a contrast matrix and follow the code below: fitGene<-lmFit(gene,design=design,weights=arrayWt); fitGene2<,cont.matrix) fitGene2<-eBayes(fitGene2,proportion=p); Two: Instead of using all samples at one time to fit into a lmFit function, I use two design matrix only involves A and B, T1 and T2, and second design matrix that involves A and C, T1 and T2, and make contrast matrix and fit separately. The question I have is: which one is the right one? For the first method, I will have larege DOF , and much lower p-values, but it was the same test, am I correct? Thanks for your help! Sabrina -- Sabrina [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
ADD COMMENTlink written 7.3 years ago by sabrina.shao220
Please log in to add an answer.


Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.2.0
Traffic: 136 users visited in the last hour